User talk:Giano II: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 17:11, 7 February 2008 editGiano II (talk \| contribs)22,233 edits well that appears to be that← Previous edit		Revision as of 17:18, 7 February 2008 edit undoGiano II (talk \| contribs)22,233 editsNo edit summaryNext edit →
Line 17:		Line 17:


	I see there looks to be some certainty of this resolution passing . Designed no doubt to prevent their errors and stupidity being publicly pointed out in future. No doubt the little, non-writing, Admins on IRC will have some kind of competition to see who can be the first to achieve fame by blocking me. Let's face it, fame won't come to them any other way. Sadly, for them, they will never have the opportunity. The Arbs were very ill-advised ever accepting this case. They now seem to want to risk even more mass disruption rather than accept they made a very silly mistake. However, when an '''entire case has been based on pure spite''' and revenge, I suppose one cannot really be surprised at the outcome. The Arbcom are well aware that I won't be ruled, or intimidated, by a chatroom which is exactly what such a resolution means. Neither will I hang about to play silly buggers with a chatroom.		I see there looks to be some certainty of this resolution passing . Designed no doubt to prevent their errors and stupidity being publicly pointed out in future. No doubt the little, non-writing, Admins on IRC will have some kind of competition to see who can be the first to achieve fame by blocking me. Let's face it, fame won't come to them any other way. Sadly, for them, they will never have the opportunity. The Arbs were very ill-advised ever accepting this case. They now seem to want to risk even more mass disruption rather than accept they made a very silly mistake. However, when an '''entire case has been based on pure spite''' and revenge, I suppose one cannot really be surprised at the outcome. The Arbcom are well aware that I won't be ruled, or intimidated, by a chatroom which is exactly what such a resolution means. Neither will I hang about to play silly buggers with a chatroom. The page on which I "edit warred" is now gone, it seems it never was a Misplaced Pages page - so it has not been all a waste.

	One good thing to emerge from this is Jimbo's ruling that the chatroom is now under the Arbcom's jurisdiction , something they had always denied before I raised this matter. Had I not raised these issues so forcefully, they would never have been addressed. None of you must ever, ever let them forget what Jimbo has decreed. ] (]) 17:11, 7 February 2008 (UTC)		One good thing to emerge from this is Jimbo's ruling that the chatroom is now under the Arbcom's jurisdiction , something they had always denied before I raised this matter. Had I not raised these issues so forcefully, they would never have been addressed. None of you must ever, ever let them forget what Jimbo has decreed. ] (]) 17:11, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 17:18, 7 February 2008

File:Animalibrí.gif

Old messages are at

The State of Play

I see there looks to be some certainty of this resolution passing . Designed no doubt to prevent their errors and stupidity being publicly pointed out in future. No doubt the little, non-writing, Admins on IRC will have some kind of competition to see who can be the first to achieve fame by blocking me. Let's face it, fame won't come to them any other way. Sadly, for them, they will never have the opportunity. The Arbs were very ill-advised ever accepting this case. They now seem to want to risk even more mass disruption rather than accept they made a very silly mistake. However, when an entire case has been based on pure spite and revenge, I suppose one cannot really be surprised at the outcome. The Arbcom are well aware that I won't be ruled, or intimidated, by a chatroom which is exactly what such a resolution means. Neither will I hang about to play silly buggers with a chatroom. The page on which I "edit warred" is now gone, it seems it never was a Misplaced Pages page - so it has not been all a waste.

One good thing to emerge from this is Jimbo's ruling that the chatroom is now under the Arbcom's jurisdiction , something they had always denied before I raised this matter. Had I not raised these issues so forcefully, they would never have been addressed. None of you must ever, ever let them forget what Jimbo has decreed. Giano (talk) 17:11, 7 February 2008 (UTC)